Mangal Poonamchand Parmar vs Santosh Narayan Parte Advocate - Wadikar N.M. — 183/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section (). Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.

Spl.C.S. - Spl.Civ.Suit

CNR: MHST200011012020

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Next Hearing

27th March 2026

Filing Number

343/2023

Filing Date

19-08-2022

Registration No

183/2023

Registration Date

22-08-2022

Court

Civil Court Senior Division, Wai

Judge

2-Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division Wai

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section ()

Petitioner(s)

Mangal Poonamchand Parmar

Adv. Shinde M.Y

Jaiesh Poonamchand Parmar

Respondent(s)

Santosh Narayan Parte Advocate - Wadikar N.M.

Anjana Rajendra Parte

Pranav Rajendra Parte

Yojana Rajesh Parte

Rajesh Nathuram Parte

Hearing History

Judge: 2-Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division Wai

06-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

06-02-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

09-01-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

05-12-2025

Argument on Exh.____Unready

14-11-2025

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Interim Orders

09-06-2025
Order on Exhibit

Summary: The court rejected the defendants' application seeking to dismiss the plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The court held that the limitation issue—whether the suit for specific performance of a property sale agreement dated 29.11.2013 is time-barred—is a mixed question of fact and law requiring evidence to be decided, and therefore cannot be determined at the threshold stage. The application was rejected with no costs imposed, allowing the suit to proceed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court rejected the defendants' application seeking to dismiss the plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The court held that the limitation issue—whether the suit for specific performance of a property sale agreement dated 29.11.2013 is time-barred—is a mixed question of fact and law requiring evidence to be decided, and therefore cannot be determined at the threshold stage. The application was rejected with no costs imposed, allowing the suit to proceed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Civil Court Senior Division, Wai All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case